SMT. SURINDER KAUR Vs. MOHINDER SINGH AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MANOHAR Singh, his mother Smt. Kirpal Kaur and his father Rattan Singh were tried under section 495 read with section 109, Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the Code) on a complaint by Smt. Surinder Kaur, appellant, wife of Manohar Singh, respondent, and acquitted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, vide judgment dated October 9, 1973. The appeal was admitted to hearing by a Division Bench as it involved an important question of law as to whether a bona fide mistake of fact regarding the previous marriage would be a good defence against the charge under section 494 of the Code.

(2.) ACCORDING to the allegations in the complaint, Smt. Surrinder Kaur, appellant, was married to Manohar Singh, respondent, on February 8, 1963. They lived together for six/seven years and two daughters were born out of their wedlock. In the year 1970, Harinder Singh, brother of Surrinder Kaur, came to know that Manohar Singh, respondent, was previously married to Smt. Kashmir Kaur which fact he conveyed to the appellant, who then filed the present complaint on August 17, 1971 alleging that Manohar Singh contracted a marriage with her according to Anandkaraj rites having concealed from her the fact of the former marriage. Rattan Singh and Smt. Kirpal Kaur, father and mother of Manohar Singh, respondent, were charged with the abatement of the said offence.

(3.) THE accused, when examined under section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, admitted his marriage with Surinder Kaur, complainant but denied that he was ever married to Kashmir Kaur. He further stated that Smt. Kashmir Kaur had filed a petition under section 488. Code of Criminal Procedure, against him for maintenance which was dismissed by the learned Magistrate Amritsar on July 11, 1962 and the revision petition filed against that order also failed and that he showed both the orders to Smt. Surinder Kaur and her parents. It was after full satisfaction that the marriage of Smt. Surinder Kaur with him was solemnised. He further stated that at the time of his marriage with Smt. Surinder Kaur, he had no knowledge that Smt. Kashmir Kaur and filed any revision petition in the High Court against the order of the learned Magistrate and the learned Magistrate and the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissing her petition under section 488, Code of Criminal Procedure.